Yes, I agree. Fighters are defenders first and foremost - they shouldn't be able to compete with rangers (arguably the highest damage striker class) in pure damage. Come close, maybe. But actually compete? I'd rather not.

Combat Challenge: On an attack can mark foe. When marked foe that is adjacient shifts or makes an attack that doesn't include me, I can take a melee basic attack as an immediate interrupt.Combat Superiority: +4 bonus on opportunity attacks, an enemy struck by my opp attack stops moving.Tempest Technique: Two weapon def as bonus feat. +1 to attack with weapons that have off-hand quality. +2 to damage while wielding two weapons and wearing chainmail or lighter armor. +3 to damage if using weapons with the off-hand quality.Throwing Action: When spend an AP to take an extra action, I can make a ranged basic attack as a free action, not provoking OA.Throwing Master: Increase the size by one die of a thrown weapon.Uncanny Thrower: Take no penalty for throwing a weapon at long range.

Two-fold Torment, +22 vs AC(two attacks), 1d10+17/1d10+15, push 3 squares and if have CA do 2 extra damage on each hit.Appalling Crunch, +22 vs AC, 3d10+17, enemies within 2 squares of the target are marked. gain 5 temp hpLandslide Strike, Can shift two squares before the attacks +22/21 vs AC(two attacks), 2d10+19/2d10+17(melee, main/off), or +21 vs AC(two ranged attacks, different targets), 2d8+16.Boggling Smash, +22 vs AC, 3d10+22, the target is dazed and takes a -2 to attacks until end of my next turn.Unbreakable, Immed Reaction, when hit by an attack, reduce the damage by 10Bolstering Stride, Move action, Move 5 squares, ending adjacient to an ally and gain 2d8+5 temp hp.Strikebacks(Immed React): Make a melee basic att against an adjacient foe that hits me.

Daily attacks

Defensive Resurgance: Minor Action. I can spend a healing surge and gain a +2 to AC until the start of my next turn.Spitting Cobra Stance: Minor Action, As an opportunity action you can make a ranged basic attack against any enemy within 5 squares that moves closer to you.Quicksilver Stance: Minor Action, I can shift one square as a move action and make a basic attack, if I have combat advantage the attack does an extra 4 damageSmash and Grab: Must have a hand free, +22 vs AC, 3d10+22 and I grab the target, each time I sustain the grab I do 1d10+17 damage.Eruption of Steel: (Melee. Two attacks, main/off)+22/21 vs AC. 2d10+19/2d10+18(miss half damage). Make a secondary attack against a different creature +22/21 vs AC. 1d10+19/1d10+18(miss half damage)
If ranged: Primary attacks: +21/+21 vs AC. 2d8+16/2d8+16(miss for half): Secondary attacks, must be against two different targets: +21/+21 vs AC. 1d8+16/1d8+16(miss for half)

Magic Item Daily Powers 2/day +1 per milestone

Voidcrystal Armor: Immed Reaction, use when att misses my AC. Weapon used to attack does half dam(save ends), if attacker was unarmed, instead they take ongoing 10 dam(save ends)Battering Craghammer: Make a melee basic attack vs all enemies in a blast 3.Dwarven Boots(Immed Inter): Use when power would push, pull, slide, or knock prone. Attacker rerolls and used second attack even if lower.Cloak of displacement: II: Use when hit by melee or ranged att, Attacker must reroll and use second result even if lower, if attacker misses I can teleport one square.

I was never really able to play him to full effect(like I said, 1 encounter). I didn't max Wis, because I wanted hammer rhythym and good damage on a miss.

Overall, I don't think marked scourge is bad. It is a paragon feat, which we are liable not to see for a long time here. You really have to focus on it to get good damage out of it. On fighter being a striker, than can sort of be their secondary role, just like other classes have secondary roles. The above combo is limited, because it does use dailes and AP, so it can't be done all the time as well.

If it had to be limited, I would say: once per opponent per standard action.

Well yes, striker is definitely a fighter's secondary role. I'm OK with them having, say, 2nd or 3rd place damage, but they shouldn't be able to out-damage a ranger. After all, that is the point of the ranger.

And ... that's odd. I was dead sure Marked Scourge was heroic. Well, that eliminates part of why I'm averse to it. I do like your suggestion for limiting it though, Evo.

Well yes, striker is definitely a fighter's secondary role. I'm OK with them having, say, 2nd or 3rd place damage, but they shouldn't be able to out-damage a ranger. After all, that is the point of the ranger.

Any class can focus on damage if it wanted to. Remember, the striker role is not all about damage. It's about mobility too. That is something that a fighter lacks and can't be good at. Marking and such makes that not a good idea. A multi-classed fighter/ranger isn't really a fighter anymore(if taking the power feats). A fighter/ranger shouldn't be compared to straight fighter anymore. In terms of DPR comparing it to a fighter/rogue might be better.

I don’t really lean one way or the other with Marked Scourge, but one thing puzzles me…

Why is the discussion based on comparing extreme cases of optimization and abuse that only work in unlikely situations? It just seems like unreal scenarios if they never actually come up in play. I don’t see how a rating of whether rangers or avengers or whatever come in 1st or 2nd place for obscure optimized damage builds has much to do with how the majority of players approach their characters or how the majority of PCs compare to each other.
I do apologize, because this is probably due to my lack of understanding how some of these builds actually work.

I believe this may have been mentioned before, but could Marked Scourge be made reasonable by adding “once per round” or “once per foe” or “does not stack with other Wis bonuses”?

I think a simple "does not stack with other Wis bonuses to damage" would be enough. Then it's no better than the Pit Fighter feature. Personally, the part I have issue with is that with the feat and the PP you get to add Wis twice to most of your attacks.

I think it might be a good idea to add a clause like we did with AV; something like "problematic elements can be omitted by proposal later". I think it'd be foolish to think that we've dealt with everything potentially bad in the book - it is a big book.

The only other thing I can think of would be Tempest + Two-Blade Warrior, but maybe since no one's said anything about it it's not bad. I guess that the fighter would basically be giving up his talent to pull that trick, so probably not a big deal.

I believe a book, power, feat or skill should be taken as written or not be included at all. I think its pretty herky-jerky when all the different powers are re-written/editted and there are a bunch of different house rules out there. There are going to be a lot of different books coming down the pipelines and that doesn't even include non-WotC ones. Are we really going to wait at least 4 months before using content because we are worried about a couple extra points of damage at higher levels? I'm sure the monsters have enough hit points to take them. If you were so worried about this, we should only have 22 points to play with instead of 25. Then when new players want to make a new PCs they have to file through all the different house rules to make sure they type up their powers the correct way before they are authorized.
I agree with another poster that we should just run with the material given as is. If it starts to become abused, then deal with it. You can use RPGA/LFR guidelines for what they accept as framework Or at least let the physical WotC books get a pass and deal with the Dragon articles/ 3rd party provided matterials in the current format. But look at the Proposal for FRPG, its been a week without a vote and pretty much loss of discussion. There is still a minotaur issue floating about. I know DM's don't want their games getting high-jacked, but is all this nessecary? Its election day, its time to vote! =v)